I get the whole "I bought a surround system and I want things in surround" argument. But the truth is the new mix on The Terminator misses the mark in a few key scenes. It's not totally bad but the old adage, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" really applies here. I don't mind a new mix as long as the original is treated with the respect and care it deserves. I want to experience The Terminator the way 1984 James Cameron wanted me to experience it although I'm not sure how much 2014 James Cameron is involved with the Blu-ray releases. He may be pulling a bit of a Lucas on us..

Concurred.... That's why I suggested the original mono tracks should always be included along side the newly remastered 5.1 tracks.

I usually watch my Bond films with their original mixes, even though they are lossy. Especially for OHMSS.

The same is true for MOONRAKER. The original 2.0 Dolby Mix and the first 5.1 mix are gone. The mixes that were used for the laserdiscs and first DVDs were much better than what is used on the Blu-rays. The Surround info is almost gone as well as the bass. This flattening of the sound has become very typical when newer masters are done for HD and ported over to Blu. The same is true for XANDAU and FLASH GORDON. XANDAU originally had a 4.0 mix with great surround. FLASH GORDON's 2.0 mix was much more open and the stereo was wide with excellent surround info - no all that is gone.
Paramount had screwed up STAR TREK III years ago when it first released it in 5.1, but that was quickly fixed.
I know the producer of SUPERMAN: THE MOIVE and tried to work with WB to fix the new mix on that film as well as to replace the 2.0 mix back to the film. When they did a new 5.1 for the original theatrical edition of SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE they just flattened down the 5.1 but there are different volumes levels and even different sound effects now. When they did go back to find the original mix they relied on some idiot that didn't understand that what they had found wasn't a complete mix and it was out of phase causing dialog to leak out into the surround.
I was on the phone with this guy and when out of my way to procure a Laserdisc copy to duplicate as a reference for him - he wouldn't even bother to listen. The producer of the film gave up trying to deal with this because the guy WB had chosen was so annoying and stupid.
It's very annoying that a new generation of idiots have entered the picture who don't do their homework and research and are producing product that ruins the original work and artistry of those who created them.

I actually do have that laserdisc! You might have a problem syncing that track to the Blu-ray master. Near the end of the movie, an extra line of dialog can be heard in the Ultimate Edition DVD and now the Blu-ray. It is "His brotherhood also have exotic ways to keep it a closed shop" and is said by Blofeld.

Doesn't the laserdisc also lack the line, "Told you that crowd might discourage them"? Or does that line not involve any additional screen time (Bond's off camera when he says it)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saucerful

Fair enough. Like I've said before, if it's an upmix, I can deal with it. It's including new information just to "fill up" the surround sound that I find to be a little offensive in its revisionism. And even aside from the purist argument, I've watched films that I've never seen before and still noticed the sound effects were off. The first time I ever watched Vertigo (I blind bought the Universal Legacy Series DVD several years ago) and I knew right away. I thought to myself "there's no way those footsteps were recorded in 1958".

Vertigo was definitely my "come to Jesus" event with regards to remixed audio tracks. Never having heard the original mono, I also found it blatantly obvious that I was hearing 1996 sound effects (and too loud at that). I hate to imagine how distracting it might've been had I been familiar with the original track.

Now, courtesy of the miracle of blu-ray, we have a much better 5.1 remix, plus the option of the original track (albeit lossy), and that abomination has been banished to the land of wind and shadows.

I ain't too all-fire crazy about that damned Jaws 5.1 track either. Or The Terminator.

I get the whole "I bought a surround system and I want things in surround" argument. But the truth is the new mix on The Terminator misses the mark in a few key scenes. It's not totally bad but the old adage, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" really applies here. I don't mind a new mix as long as the original is treated with the respect and care it deserves. I want to experience The Terminator the way 1984 James Cameron wanted me to experience it although I'm not sure how much 2014 James Cameron is involved with the Blu-ray releases. He may be pulling a bit of a Lucas on us..

Cameron (or at least his production company) still signs off on the audio and video elements used for home video releases. He's a lot like Lucas in one respect, having become more enamoured with the technology needed to make movies than with the movies themselves.

And, like Lucas, he now regards his earlier work as a technical embarassment, given what he's done with his later movies, so I'm not surprised that he rebuilt the audio for The Terminator from top to bottom when given the opportunity with the early noughties' SE DVD release.

LOL!!! No prob man, and I agree with your post. If the studios did an all out audio revamp of older movies with a bunch of noticeable new effects, then I can certainly understand why the purists get upset. I see no issue with adding the original mono tracks as a second option on older blu-rays. Another reason why they could be left out is to save space on the blu leaving more data for video and lossless 5.1 audio? I mean how much space would a mono track take up on average? At a minimum it should be at least a lossless mono track.

I believe a 24-bit mono track would take about 700-800 MB for an average movie. In any event it would be about 1 GB for a mono track and maybe 2 GB for a stereo track. In an era where 50 GB discs usually have 33 GB taken by the audio and video, an extra GB will make no difference. It is just laziness or deliberate omission that causes this.

Heck, the HK release of Red Cliff fits 3 7.1 mixes (PCM, TrueHD, and DTS-HD MA) and a killer video transfer on a 50 GB disc so a Bond movie would have plenty of room for a DTS-HD MA mono track.

I believe a 24-bit mono track would take about 700-800 MB for an average movie. In any event it would be about 1 GB for a mono track and maybe 2 GB for a stereo track. In an era where 50 GB discs usually have 33 GB taken by the audio and video, an extra GB will make no difference. It is just laziness or deliberate omission that causes this.

Heck, the HK release of Red Cliff fits 3 7.1 mixes (PCM, TrueHD, and DTS-HD MA) and a killer video transfer on a 50 GB disc so a Bond movie would have plenty of room for a DTS-HD MA mono track.

According to this, a 48/24 LPCM mono track for a 2hr movie would take up 0.98 GB. There is plenty of space for this track. I honestly think it is not included because it is assumed people want multichannel remixes, or they are included in lossy format to make the remix sound better. There is absolutely no excuse to not include these, especially when you have access to the film elements.

Yep, there's really no excuse to leave off the mono tracks these days. And even with all of the additional language tracks on modern 'one size' releases, there's enough room for a lossless mono option.

An unfortunate hatred of original audio (mainly mono, sometimes stereo) has become all-too-prominent a feature of the digital era. "Audiophiles" (inverted commas crucial) bleat on about wanting to enjoy the top-of-the-line sound system they paid for - so go watch any genuine Dolby Digital or DTS multi-channel movie made over the last 15-20 years if that's what you REALLY care about. I care about the film and they way it was originally presented. Alas, many distributors (Warners, most notably) don't give a damn for people like us. Including original audio - even in a lossless state - should be mandatory. I can't enjoy Dirty Harry as it was intended because "audiophiles" and ignorant productions execs insist I suffer their 5.1 remix. Every time we hear an inane "where's my remix" or "yuck, only mono" remark on this (or other) forum(s) it's like a nail in the proverbial coffin.

An unfortunate hatred of original audio (mainly mono, sometimes stereo) has become all-too-prominent a feature of the digital era. "Audiophiles" (inverted commas crucial) bleat on about wanting to enjoy the top-of-the-line sound system they paid for - so go watch any genuine Dolby Digital or DTS multi-channel movie made over the last 15-20 years if that's what you REALLY care about. I care about the film and they way it was originally presented. Alas, many distributors (Warners, most notably) don't give a damn for people like us. Including original audio - even in a lossless state - should be mandatory. I can't enjoy Dirty Harry as it was intended because "audiophiles" and ignorant productions execs insist I suffer their 5.1 remix. Every time we hear an inane "where's my remix" or "yuck, only mono" remark on this (or other) forum(s) it's like a nail in the proverbial coffin.

I wouldn't call the majority who are boisterous about this audiophiles (nor would I call myself one). There are a lot of pretend audiophiles on this site, some of whom involve themselves in these discussions. The fact is true audiophiles go to the greatest measures to hear the best out of their content, with the goal being to actually listen as intended. You can say you care, but IMO, unless you are one of those who does this, then you're not really serious about wanting to experience it the way it was originally presented. It's all good to want the original track to be on the disc (I would prefer the option to be available to me as well), however the likelihood your system is set up so you can hear them exactly how they are meant to be is slim. Therefore the sound effects you hear in your home will not be same as the original presentation even if it is on the disc, no matter how much you might want it to be. For example, like I said in my previous post, anyone who doesn't have their room acoustically treated, automatically fails, and is not hearing the presentation as intended

Heh. I don't care how expensive and/or expansive someone's set up is, because the remix for Terminator will still sound NOTHING like the movie that I grew up watching. You (repeatedly) say that our piddly systems are no good. Fine. Even so, the mono mix for Terminator still sounds far more like the movie that I know and love.

I would have thought that since its so easy to include a mono track anyway, that even the "surround sound only" fans would still be curious to check out the orignal audio as a alternative, especially if its so different in terms of sound effects to the 5.1 remix version.

They might not sit down and re-watch the entire thing with mono sound, but they would check it out..

I would have thought that since its so easy to include a mono track anyway, that even the "surround sound only" fans would still be curious to check out the orignal audio as a alternative, especially if its so different in terms of sound effects to the 5.1 remix version.

They might not sit down and re-watch the entire thing with mono sound, but they would check it out..

Not to mention the fact that mono and stereo tracks take up hardly any space even if they are lossless.

This needs the original audio!
i can't understand how the creators don't respect film history.
Ok, i understand that it's their creations and they can do what they want with it, but the right thing to do would be to include always the original form of a film!

By the way, if the new 5.1 mix had the same effects and music without any altered and new effects, i would be less disappointed, even if the mono wasn't included.
It's another thing to expand a mono or stereo to 5.1 (that means that only the position of the effects is changing and not their quality), and another thing completely to make a new mix with new effects!

The UK arrow release features a 2.0 PCM track as well as a DTS-HD MA 5.1 track (same as the US release 5.1 track). From what I have read on here, is that the 2.0 track is probably from the 35mm print, whereas the 5.1 track has come from the 70mm print (6-track).

This needs the original audio!
i can't understand how the creators don't respect film history.
Ok, i understand that it's their creations and they can do what they want with it, but the right thing to do would be to include always the original form of a film!

By the way, if the new 5.1 mix had the same effects and music without any altered and new effects, i would be less disappointed, even if the mono wasn't included.
It's another thing to expand a mono or stereo to 5.1 (that means that only the position of the effects is changing and not their quality), and another thing completely to make a new mix with new effects!

Yup that 5.1 mix is a terrible representation of the movies soundtrack.

If a movie sounds that different between the different audio tracks than the original track should always be included.

The original Black Christmas - the levels are off on the 5.1 mix, and some of the sound is also a bit out of sync with the video. The original mono is included. It's lossy, but so is the surround.

Oh, I'd managed to forget about that train wreck.

Quite apart from some of the modern sound effects, the worst is during the

[Show spoiler]"eyeball behind door" scene -- the 5.1 includes music that's not supposed to be there, effectively obliterating one of the scariest moments of the film, when the killer whispers, "Don't tell them what we did, Agnes."